Jump to content
 

Bachmann announce Class 90 (OO)


Andy Y
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Gold

Have just received an email from rails stating the class 90 is due soon which we know but it also details the features of this model with pictures such as the rotating buffers, lights, DCC fitting etc.

 

I am proper excited now!

cheers

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Markwj said:

Have just received an email from rails stating the class 90 is due soon which we know but it also details the features of this model with pictures such as the rotating buffers, lights, DCC fitting etc.

 

https://us4.campaign-archive.com/?u=2647f1b386f7ba8c60ce37a0a&id=d2f120a1da

 

Good design for decoder access without taking the body off.

 

Edited by BR(S)
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

They should be here well in time for when my layout go's to the GCR model show in June.

I got the IC and RFD versions on order.

One thing that looks a little concerning for me is how far set back the NEM pocket looks to be behind the valence.

With my layout "Alderford" being a terminus station I need to fit Kadee couplings at both ends of all loco's so I'm hoping that a No 20 Kadee will be just proud of the buffers.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The downside about being on the fence...should I buy and RfD version or Freightliner Powerhaul version??? The model is superb from the pictures shared by Rails of Sheffield.

However IMHO and I've shared this before, I cannot stand that second lower arm on the pantograph, really does spoil the model for me, I'll need to have it removed. Also from the images shared by Rails of Sheffield, the TDM* cables look horribly thick. 

I think I should just wait for an EWS or DB Cargo UK one, or just stick to my pet project which is my Hornby Class 90 that I've super detailed myself.

Decisions..... decisions.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

spec is very good.  not sure if the buffing plates fitted are dummy or sprung or whether the cab lights are independent or if both come on automatically in the "night" mode or stay on in direction of travel.....

 

there are  2 removable roof panels - a great innovation.    one for the light switches (similar to that found on the class 85) but also a larger panel to access the decoder area.   it took me by surprise to see such a big access panel on a model.

 

one speaker is pre-fitted if you missed it.  amazed Bachmann haven't released a demo video like they did for the Mk2f coaches to show the pantograph and lights working.  Maybe they saved the time to just get the model done and on the container......

 

certainly a lot of model for the  money and likely to oust the Class 85 as the new standard for British AC overhead locos and I guess stay there for quite sometime.

 

to function reliably I think they have got the look of pantograph as close as is possible in this scale to the real thing.  I would like to hear peoples suggestions if they think they could do a better job of it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, letterspider said:

A couple of questions about the pantograph - how would it operate under catenary as I don't see it is sprung

also as it appears to be plastic, would that suffer increased wear and tear upon metal wire?

 

The pan is sprung internally and Is all made of metal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 20/03/2019 at 21:20, lyneux said:

If you remove the lower arm the pan will no longer function. The real thing has a chain running inside a tubular lower arm to retain orientation of the upper arm.

 

Might be best to scratch a new one in brass?


I don't see it as much of a problem as I don't require it to be sprung and held up against the wire. I plan to have them set 1mm below the wire. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MGR Hooper! said:


I don't see it as much of a problem as I don't require it to be sprung and held up against the wire. I plan to have them set 1mm below the wire. 

 

Have you tried this? Achieving 1mm tolerance for a wire 450mm long will be impressive. Have you got any photos of your layout?

 

Guy

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a tad 'on the fence' with this new 90 and sadly nowhere near as excited about its arrival as I hoped I would be.  One thing that has always struck me about this model is that both the body and bogies appear to be largely one-piece mouldings (aside from some sparse roof detail).  It is evident from the photo above that the dampers appear to be merely 'painted on', so too the bogie pipework and dread-upon-dread also the moulded cabside handrails.  In this day and age of super-detailed models it would surely seem reasonable (even obligatory) to expect to have these aforementioned details as separately-fitted items.  Looking at the bogies alone and there is nothing new about the way these have been represented when comparing to anything released by Bachmann in the last decade or so - ie. a basic one-piece moulding.  Not to mention I do wish that they would get their heads around the overscale bufferbeam/cab-front pipework that they still seem to incorporate onto every new model.  Glazing also seems to be highly 'goldfish bowl' in appearance, which for a model with such a prominent style of windscreen it would have been nice to see some attempt at improvement upon.

 

Small gripes some might say, but I do find it disappointing that Bachmann seem to have opted for what are, in my view at least, bordering on short-term 'wow factor' gimmicks of raising pantograph/swivel buffers etc (that in effect will surely be rarely used) - all nice additions of course, but my feeling is that we have these 'features' in place of actually pushing the boundaries forward in terms of fidelity. 

 

Having seen the model now a few times in the flesh and each time wholeheartedly trying to persuade myself to be 'wowed' (I really do want to fall in love with this model), but alas I cannot help but feel slightly underwhelmed each time.  Sure, while it is indeed a 'nice' model and does definitely look as a 90 should in terms of shape etc, there is however for me very little (if anything) in terms of 'raising the bar'.  And that's more than a little disappointing, especially as we know Bachmann are more than capable of producing detail-riddled models, for instance the forthcoming Ransomes steam crane, to name but one example.

 

I appreciate that others will applaud the [debatably] 'novelty factor' element of swivelling buffers etc etc; and also realize I'll likely be blasted-down in flames for Bachmann blasphemy, but really I can only say what I see - and that is a 'good' model for certain, but in no way what one may regard as groundbreaking; and furthermore one that may find it dates rather quickly in a market where far more highly-detailed models appear to be on the horizon from competing forces.  

 

Just one person's viewpoint.

 

cheers

Al

 

Edited by YesTor
  • Agree 3
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

On that painted sample 90037, is the railfreight distribution logo aligned correctly? I thought the top of the red and yellow diamonds part was normally along the split between the greys, with the solid red into the upper grey. There looks to be light grey visible along the top edge. Is the logo perhaps 1 or 2 mm too low on the bodyside?

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, GordonC said:

On that painted sample 90037, is the railfreight distribution logo aligned correctly? I thought the top of the red and yellow diamonds part was normally along the split between the greys, with the solid red into the upper grey. There looks to be light grey visible along the top edge. Is the logo perhaps 1 or 2 mm too low on the bodyside?

 

Well spotted!  Agreed!  Oooopsy!  :wacko:

 

90037 London Euston 24.04.90

 

Edited by YesTor
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, YesTor said:

So too the bogie pipework and dread-upon-dread also the moulded cabside handrails.  In this day and age of super-detailed models it would surely seem reasonable (even obligatory) to expect to have these aforementioned details as separately-fitted items.

 



Such a set-up for handrails isn't easy to replicate with wire.  Handrail wire is always a tad overscale and this means that Bachmann will have to have an unusually wide and deep recess for this. It's one of the most efficient ways to replicate such handrails.

 

Not shooting you down, just pointing it out as I had to build a model once for someone that had the same type of handrails. It takes a lot of time to assemble wire handrails like this.

  • Agree 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 hours ago, GordonC said:

On that painted sample 90037, is the railfreight distribution logo aligned correctly? I thought the top of the red and yellow diamonds part was normally along the split between the greys, with the solid red into the upper grey. There looks to be light grey visible along the top edge. Is the logo perhaps 1 or 2 mm too low on the bodyside?

 

Definately too low rather than incorrectly dimensioned. There should be a grey strip underneath whereas on the livery sample the logo goes to the bottom of the bodyside.

 

Let’s hope Bachmann spotted this before approving production. Printing errors like this really should be spotted when checking a model before sign off, yet it won’t be the first time if it’s wrong.

Edited by brushman47544
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I have dropped Bachmann a line asking if they have allowed for deletion of the aero fairings mentioned earlier to allow earlier versions to be released such as 90 010 seen here (sorry cannot now upload the you tube video) at its naming ceremony at Euston in 1989. 

 

Title is "90010 naming ceremony London Euston 15th November 1989"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree that deletion with a modelling knife is the way to go if an early version is required.  Bachmann advised that to allow deletion via tooling to allow a simple unclipping of the 4 pieces would have proven more expensive and could have jeopardised the whole project.  and yes very few ran without the fairings.   At least we know now.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...